Click Banner For More Info See All Sponsors

So Long and Thanks for All the Fish!

This site is now closed permanently to new posts.
We recommend you use the new Townsy Cafe!

Click anywhere but the link to dismiss overlay!

Results 1 to 19 of 19

  • Share this thread on:
  • Follow: No Email   
  • Thread Tools
  1. TopTop #1
    Larry Robinson's Avatar
    WaccoBB Poet Laureate

    Sustainability and Sebastopol’s Northeast Area

    Sustainability and Sebastopol’s Northeast Area

    I don’t know of any city or community in California - or the United States, for that matter - that is truly sustainable. As a society, we are living far beyond our means and drawing down our inherited resource account at the Bank of Nature. However, I don’t know of many communities who are doing more to become sustainable than Sebastopol.

    ...

    [Larry posted a more complete version of this later in this thread]
    Last edited by Barry; 01-03-2008 at 03:28 PM.
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  2. TopTop #2
    Helen Shane's Avatar
    Helen Shane
     

    Re: Sustainability and Sebastopol’s Northeast Area

    Sebastopol Preservation Coalition



    and the Northeast Area Plan

    A truly sustainable community would have a stable population. The dictionary defines stable: Fixed, steadfast. not changing or fluctuating. That is why Sebastopol should not change its General Plan without engaging the citizens on whether or not to abandon its vision of a small country town.

    Allowing most new buildings to be four stories, on top of parking or fill under, does not make for the harmony and low profile of a small country town.

    Jettisoning traffic standards and the carbon emissions of 8100 new weekday car trips do not contribute to sustainability or the harmony of a small town.


    In adopting the Urban Growth Boundary, it was understood that we wished not to sprawl beyond our then current boundaries. It was not understood that we would necessarily grow beyond our means.


    Only when a Water Supply Assessment based on known resources and known water uses now and for the next 20 years has been completed can we know that we will have sufficient water for our current use. This is quite apart from the needs of about 1350 new residents plus those involved in the operation of 391,000 sq. feet of retail and commercial space, plus whatever the patrons of such establishments might require.



    We think the Northeast Area Plan is just too big.

    If you agree, please come to the meeting of
    Sebastopol Preservation Coalition at
    7:00 p.m. on January 9 at Palm Drive Hospital.

    The Northeast Plan is very big.
    Let’s make the best of it, not the most of it.

    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  3. TopTop #3
    Holly Downing
    Guest

    Re: Sustainability and Sebastopol’s Northeast Area

    To conflate "sustainability" with growth and dense developments defies reality. The nature of true sustainability is constancy, whereby no additional resources are used. (Interested readers might like the inspiring book "Ancient Futures" by Helena Norberg-Hodges, about the Ladakh, who have historically lived sustainably for thousands of years in the Himalayas, with a constant population.)

    So we don't live in the high and inaccessible Himalayas and we don't want to live without modern conveniences and connection to the modern economy. Some people want new stores and businesses, and some people want to make money by building and leasing/selling those buildings. Fine. But let's just be clear that this is not about sustainability.

    As it happens, the proposed Sebastopol Northeast Plan would, according to the EIR, generate 55,627 new vehicle trips each week. What would their greenhouse gas emissions amount to? And how would they contribute toward Sebastopol sustainability? Or toward the reduction of energy consumption? How would the demolition of the 230,000 sq. ft. of existing light industrial buildings now in that area, contribute to sustainability? Or the building materials for the construction of 391,000 sq. ft. of new retail and commercial
    buildings and 300-320 new housing units?

    If the goal is to leave as light a human footprint as possible, while allowing some economic growth, how about keeping that growth both modest and sensible? Like not building in a flood plain, even if that is structurally possible by compacting the earth and adding fill. It can be done. But is it sensible and wise? Why not keep new development close to the current city plaza, in the old lumber yard, where fill could be kept to a minimum? And why not continue to use the existing industrial buildings for light industry, which have the potential of being useful and reducing traffic trips elsewhere (the NE Plan would eliminate all industrial except for the existing cement factory).

    Why not work with the current Sebastopol General Plan zoning for that area? It allows considerable latitude for mixed-use development (housing, retail and commercial) in much of the NE area, including some light industrial, but with reasonable traffic, height and growth restrictions.

    If we're talking about economic health, let's bolster the historic downtown along Main St. and the Plaza, and not build a separate new downtown that would most likely compete and draw business away. And if we're seriously talking about increasing sustainability, shouldn't land that is in a flood plain be returned to its natural functions whenever possible? Or used for compatible activities like a community garden and farmers market? The phrase "no net fill" is empty; it simply attempts to displace the consequences of fill elsewhere, but without containing any ability to do so. Wouldn't the sustainable thing to do to not fill to begin with?
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  4. TopTop #4
    Praksys's Avatar
    Praksys
     

    Sustainability and Sebastopol's Northeast Area

    Sebastopol’s Northeast Area
    December 30, 2007

    Can’t we pay more attention to children and their future instead of running around telling them the sky is falling? Would it be fruitful to consider an alternative?

    Investing in just the right Cultural/Educational
    Facilities could benefit the community while attracting visitors from outside Sonoma County. This approach may in fact produce more economic benefits with fewer negative impacts on people and place.


    Daniel Osmer
    Ambassador for Science/Youth


    I have recently read the personal views and defense of the N.E. Area Plan by two city council member's and a member of the planning department. I am not a newcomer here and I support the idea of “sustainability”. I do appreciate the sincere dedication and work that you do on behalf of all of us.

    Nonetheless, I believe future economic sustainability will depend on our ability to make engaging educational opportunities for children in subjects that promote clear, critical thinking such as writing, science, economics and ecology. The most thriving economies of the new century will be driven by innovation. Innovation comes from human creativity. Creativity begins in childhood play. Therefore, the highest and most effective economic decision any community can make is to provide ample investment for cultivating the capacities and talents in every child.


    Congressional Task Force On:
    The Future Of American Innovation report:

    “The committee is deeply
    concerned that the scientific
    and technical building blocks
    of our economic leadership are
    eroding at a time when many
    other nations are gathering
    strength.”
    -From the National
    Academies Report,
    “Rising Above the
    Gathering Storm,”
    2005

    Economic authorities recognize that education is probably our best investment in the future and we should get clear on what we expect from these kids. Every County in America could focus on renewable energy development and training in the form of a Science and Ecology Center. It is potentially a talent and prosperity magnet for the entire region. Sonoma County can set the example for the nation by establishing the first County Renewable Energy Lab that provides hands-on training for enhancing science teacher’s skills as well as students.
    Innovation Institute, Inc. (I3)
    Let us build a science Exploratorium in conjunction with the Sebastopol Center for the Arts – a safe and fun place for families, grandparents and grandchildren to play and learn together, a monument to education for the coming world.


    ***

    Responses to Larry Robinson:

    (Larry) A truly sustainable community (and society) would have a stable population.

    I do not think this is true, however. If you believe this, why would you propose adding 300 housing units and increase the population and energy usage by an unprecedented amount?


    (Larry) In America today, studies reveal that the average item of food travels 1500 miles. This is not sustainable. Rising transportation costs will dramatically change where we get our food. This means reducing our energy consumption, most of which goes to heat and cool buildings and to move people and goods.

    Then why propose adding so many more new buildings to heat and cool? Even with green techniques, the N.E. Area Plan will use more resources. Moreover, will these new residents all be riding bikes to work or will they really add 8,000 vehicle trips and associated CO2 emissions? Our town’s streets already cause long delays even before these 8000. In addition, are you sure that we are utilizing the buildings we already have? I would support an initiative that mapped out visually and in detail the current resources of the community.



    (Larry) “… it will be prohibitively expensive for most of us to drive private automobiles as casually as we do today. … (in the N.E. Area) The streets will be narrow and the sidewalks wide to encourage bicyclists and pedestrians and discourage cars. The more we all walk or bike, the healthier we will be as a society.”


    Most people cannot realistically depend on bicycles for their transportation. It is dangerous and against the law to bicycle on our sidewalks. This seems a little over the top. Many are not physically fit enough to bicycle and to insist that people get healthier by giving up cars is a little unrealistic, don’t you think? Even if you are lucky enough to be fit and have work that allows you to depend on peddle power, most people are not in that situation. Do you expect everyone else to adopt your particular life style? As Vaclav Havel once said to our own Congress, “God help us from those who would know what is best for us.”


    (Larry) We will want - and need - an efficient public transportation system close to where we live. This is only feasible with sufficient population density. We will need to live closer to each other and to our places of work, shopping and recreation.



    If public transportation is so important, why did Sebastopol abandon the train? Seems to me I have heard the ‘conventional wisdom’ of high-density development before. Is there another way to think about it? I don’t see where businesses are going to flock to Sebastopol to open a retail store. The sub-prime fallout will continue next year and will have a dampening effect on city and county tax revenues. This might be a good time to stick to basics and create a dialogue about the long-term future for Sebastopol.


    (Larry) Many people in Sebastopol and West County now drive to Santa Rosa to shop. If they could find what they need locally, not only would they save a lot of time, money and greenhouse gases, but the sales taxes they pay would stay in Sebastopol.

    How local do you mean and what is “buying local”? It is a nice one-liner, but I think it is a very vague and dubious concept that has little efficacy in the modern world we live in. A city council member recently said to me, “We need to build up the N. E. Area so that we can compete with Windsor and Healdsburg.” So, does this mean that Santa Rosa is not local? What happened to “cultivating the spirit of cooperation” suggested at the end of your article? How can each town in Sonoma County find their own unique voice and economic contribution in concert with each other rather than in competition?


    (Larry) Old ways of thinking, doing business and living that have served us in the past may not serve so well in the future.

    It seems to me that the rhetoric of competition and the idea that we need to be imitating Windsor and Healdsburg is not only old thinking, but unimaginative thinking too! Perhaps Sebastopol can sponsor a contest for new efficient vehicle designs and concepts. Alternatively, sponsor a local team to enter an existing solar electric design contest.


    (Larry) … Cities in California depend on sales tax revenues to pay for essential services like police and fire protection, street maintenance and such public facilities as parks and libraries.
    For the past several years, Sebastopol’s sales tax revenues have been falling. Space for new businesses is vital to our future prosperity.



    This assumption that we need new businesses in order to increase sales tax revenue for the city may be flawed for several reasons. There is an old saying I learned long ago at IBM, “Concentrate on your customers not your competition.” In other words, have we done all we can to support and incentivize the existing businesses in Sebastopol? How do we keep the existing businesses thriving while also filling the vacant commercial properties? Could it be the case that the current revenue is adequate for maintaining basic services and supporting citizen initiative rather than socially reengineering the world and us?


    (Larry) The next few years will likely be challenging ones for most of us as we transition from an unsustainable economy to a sustainable one. The Northeast Area Specific Plan offers our community one of the best ways to prepare for these changes.

    It is unrealistic and unscientific to think that the next few years will be sufficient for moving from an unsustainable economy to a sustainable one. The rhetoric of panic and short term fixes may feel good in the moment but is it really selfish and short sighted because it assumes that we adults are the ones that will solve things? I propose that it is our children and children’s children, if they are allowed to cultivate their creative intelligence, that will solve all our ecology challenges – whether industrial, human or financial ecology.

    (Larry) … cultivate the spirit of cooperation.
    I agree on this one. So let us now see some cooperation on an idea that we can all comfortably share. Thank you for your consideration.

    Daniel Osmer
    Last edited by Barry; 12-30-2007 at 04:29 PM.
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  5. TopTop #5
    Helen Shane's Avatar
    Helen Shane
     

    Re: Sustainability and Sebastopol's Northeast Area

    The City of Sebastopol Community Newsletter, Winter, 2007, sent with the City’s water/sewer bill intones the consistent, fallacious litany from the Planning Department that the proposed Northeast Area Plan “reduces potential development impacts from that already allowed under the existing General Plan. Existing zoning allows substantially more industrial, commercial and residential development than the proposed Specific Plan.”

    Well, the problem with that statement of “fact” is that the Zoning Ordinance sets forth Levels of Service for traffic and building heights and other functions that FORBID the cumulative impacts of “substantially more industrial, commercial and residential development.” Unless the Zoning Ordinance is to be tossed. Is that the Plan?

    C’mon, now, let’s have the WHOLE truth from City Staff..


    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  6. TopTop #6
    Zeno Swijtink's Avatar
    Zeno Swijtink
     

    Re: Sustainability and Sebastopol's Northeast Area

    Quote Posted in reply to the post by Helen Shane: View Post
    The City of Sebastopol Community Newsletter, Winter, 2007, sent with the City’s water/sewer bill intones (...)
    FYI, newsletter is online at https://www.ci.sebastopol.ca.us/pdfs...Winter2007.pdf
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  7. TopTop #7
    Larry Robinson's Avatar
    WaccoBB Poet Laureate

    Re: Sustainability and Sebastopol's Northeast Area

    [this is a more complete version than posted earlier]

    Sustainability and Sebastopol’s Northeast Area

    I don’t know of any city or community in California - or the United States, for that matter - that is truly sustainable. As a society, we are living far beyond our means and drawing down our inherited resource account at the Bank of Nature. However, I don’t know of many communities who are doing more to become sustainable than Sebastopol.

    A truly sustainable community (and society) would have a stable population. It would generate most of the energy it uses as locally as possible, and all of it would be from renewable sources such as wind, solar and geothermal. It would use only the amount of water equivalent to what its watershed receives in rainfall in an average year. Most of its food would be grown within 100 miles.

    The community’s sewage would be returned to the soil as fertilizer or converted to energy. It would add no persistent toxins to the air, water or soil. And it would generate no “waste”; everything no longer needed or wanted would be reused or recycled. One could, of course, include any number of other factors - transportation, manufacturing, housing, even the ability of community members to cooperate and share - in a vision of sustainability, but these are the ones from which everything else flows.

    We are, of course, embedded in an economy and a culture which are not sustainable in the long run, so there are limits to what we can accomplish locally. California’s population will continue to grow for a number of years and, with it, a demand for housing. Pulling up the drawbridge is not a responsible option. However, given these circumstances, the City of Sebastopol is committed to the goal of becoming a sustainable community and the Northeast Area Specific Plan, currently being developed, is a key piece of this strategy for several reasons.

    One is that it is becoming increasingly clear that resources such as water, land and energy are finite, while our demand for them continues to grow. To be responsible stewards of the earth now requires us to re-examine and redesign how we build, how we move ourselves and the things we need and, indeed, how we live.

    In 1998, the citizens of Sebastopol voted overwhelmingly to adopt an Urban Growth Boundary in order to halt the rural and urban (suburban) sprawl which, at the time, was the prevailing model of development in Sonoma County and which was threatening to consume the open space between cities, as well as the agricultural land surrounding us.

    In adopting the UGB, it was understood that we would “grow up, not out.” This means higher density, city-centered development. Higher density is critical to efficient resource use. Urban residents use far less water and energy per capita than do rural or suburban residents.

    In America today, studies reveal that the average item of food travels 1500 miles. This is not sustainable. Rising transportation costs will dramatically change where we get our food. At this time, much of West County’s farmland is planted in wine grapes rather than food. But I can envision a time when we will all be grateful that the vineyards served as placeholders to keep this rich land from being subdivided into homesites. Providing housing inside our city limits will reduce the development pressure on agricultural land.

    Like the other cities in Sonoma County, Sebastopol is committed to reducing its contribution to global warming. This is not only the right thing to do; it is the most expedient and practical. This means reducing our energy consumption, most of which goes to heat and cool buildings and to move people and goods.

    Focusing small scale and higher density development within the city center, particularly in an area that has already been paved over, is the most environmentally responsible approach. As the world passes peak production of petroleum, the price of transportation fuels such as gasoline and diesel will become increasingly costly. At some point it will be prohibitively expensive for most of us to drive private automobiles as casually as we do today. We will want - and need - an efficient public transportation system close to where we live, as well as the ability to move as pedestrians and bicyclists. This is only feasible with sufficient population density. We will need to live closer to each other and to our places of work, shopping and recreation.

    The Northeast Area Draft Plan covers the approximately 50 acres bounded by the west side of Morris Street, the east side of Petaluma Avenue, Laguna Parkway and the south side of Highway 12. It calls for a mix of housing, light industrial, commercial and public facilities. The streets will be narrow and the sidewalks wide to encourage bicyclists and pedestrians and discourage cars. The more we all walk or bike, the healthier we will be as a society.

    In 2000, when we developed the Street Smart Sebastopol program, the consulting team from Walkable Communities recommended that we design our community to accommodate pedestrains and cyclists, not drivers. It was understood that traffic congestion would increase as we designed for a more walkable city. This is the direction in which the Northeast Plan is developing.

    Most buildings will be multi-story - up to four stories in some cases - in order to make the most efficient use of what buildable land remains in our Urban Growth Boundary. Rooftops will be used for gardens, solar panels or a public park with a view of the Laguna. Replacing the existing hardscape with permeable paving will help improve the recharge of the aquifer to our east.

    We have enough sewer capacity for our eventual population of 10,000 at buildout. But even though our recent Water Supply Analysis gives us the assurance that we have sufficient water for that population, it only makes sense to conserve fresh water as much as possible. Because of Sebastopol’s groundbreaking mandatory Green Building Program, all new construction will be both water and energy efficient. We are seeking increased of reclaimed wastewater to be used for toilets and landscaping. We will offer incentives for building with recycled materials.

    One of the challenges in redeveloping this area is that much of it is less than 75 feet above sea level, the level at which historically we have a 1% annual chance of flooding as the Russian River backs up into the Laguna. This can be solved in two ways. On the eastern and lower area, the buildings, sidewalks and pedestrian pathways will be on a podium. This will also allow for underground parking. To the west and closer to the Plaza, they will be on compacted fill.

    In order to eliminate any increase of flooding potential downstream of us, the City Council has adopted a policy of no-net-fill. this means that any fill used to raise the ground level in the project area would have to be balanced by the removal of an equivalent volume from the flood plain. Obtaining the necessary fill from dredging the Laguna channel (which is already a consideration by state and federal water resource agencies in order to reduce the incidence of flooding) would be a significant contribution to its restoration.

    The draft plan calls for additional retail space to accommodate new businesses. Many people in Sebastopol and West County now drive to Santa Rosa to shop. If they could find what they need locally, not only would they save a lot of time, money and greenhouse gases, but buying locally would contribute to sustaining a strong local economy and supporting community services.

    An important aspect of sustainability is a balanced budget. Cities in California depend on sales tax revenues to pay for essential services like police and fire protection, street maintenance and such public facilities as parks and libraries. For the past several years, Sebastopol’s sales tax revenues have been falling. Space for new businesses is vital to our future prosperity.

    In most cases, the Plan will not specify particular uses for the commercial properties but will allow for a mixture of uses which will almost certainly change over time as conditions change in ways we cannot predict. It is exactly this unpredictability which calls for a plan which is both flexible and focused on resource conservation.

    It is also important to remember that it is a land use plan, not an actual development plan and that it will likely be 10 to 30 years before it is fully implemented. Each development project within the planning area will be thoroughly reviewed on its merits and contribution to the current community.

    The next few years will likely be challenging ones for most of us as we transition from an unsustainable economy to a sustainable one. Old ways of thinking, doing business and living that have served us in the past may not serve so well in the future. The Northeast Area Specific Plan offers our community one of the best ways to prepare for these changes. Beyond that, the best preparation for uncertain times may be to beware certainty, get know your neighbors and cultivate the spirit of cooperation.

    Larry Robinson
    Last edited by Barry; 01-03-2008 at 03:26 PM.
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  8. TopTop #8
    Helen Shane's Avatar
    Helen Shane
     

    Re: Sustainability and Sebastopol’s Northeast Area

    I fear that Council person Robinson misspoke when he stated:

    "In adopting the UGB, it was understood that we would “grow up, not out.” This means higher density, city-centered development. Higher density is critical to efficient resource use. Urban residents use far less water and energy per capita than do rural or suburban residents."
    Most buildings will be multi-story - up to four stories in some cases - in order to make the most efficient use of what buildable land remains in our Urban Growth Boundary."

    I know. I was the Coordinator of Sebastopol's citywide campaign.

    It was never never "understood that we would grow up, not out".
    The understanding and meaning of density was that we would grow "in". Infill, that is. A survey of undeveloped or underdeveloped parcels was taken and recorded. There are still such parcels to be developed even after what has been or will be built since 1996, the year of the passage of Sebastopol's UGB:

    Live-work at Florence and Healdsburg; live-work at Lyding Lane; live- work at 501 Main; another live-work on Gravenstein south, the two new Burbank projects - one on Gravenstein South and the other on Covert; the city's projects - affordable rentals adjacent to Palm Drive Hospital and the affordable for-sale project, Sequoia Village on Covert Lane. And, of course, a few single family homes as well.

    Sustainability? Affordable housing? We're working on it. And not by building four story buildings on fill and podiums, not by building in the flood plain, nor throwing the traffic levels of service to the winds.

    We are a small country town. Join in the effort to remain so.
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  9. TopTop #9
    Larry Robinson's Avatar
    WaccoBB Poet Laureate

    Re: Sustainability and Sebastopol’s Northeast Area

    Although Helen was a member of our committee, Darrell Davis and I chaired Sebastopol's UGB campaign in 1998. "Grow up, not out" was, in fact, our campaign slogan.
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  10. TopTop #10
    Helen Shane's Avatar
    Helen Shane
     

    Re: Sustainability and Sebastopol’s Northeast Area

    As to the year of the UGB's adoption, I submit the following:

    https://www.walkablestreets.com/ugb.htm

    The following fact sheet was prepared on September 21, 1998, based on information from two California organizations: The Center of Excellence for Sustainable Development and The Greenbelt Alliance.

    The first voter approved UGBs were adopted in 1996 with strong voter approval by the Sonoma County communities of Santa Rosa (59% voter approval), Sebastopol (67%), Healdsburg (71%) and the Alameda County community of Pleasanton (75%). Other communities which have adopted UGBs by council action include San Jose (by a unanimous vote), Cupertino (also by a unanimous vote), Morgan Hill, Monte Sereno, Los Gatos, and Napa. Other California communities which claim UGBs by council action are Santa Barbara and Modesto. The most recent voter approved UGBs were adopted in Novato (70% in November 1997) and Windsor (72% in January 1998)."

    As to the intent of the UGB in terms of providing density through infill or building "up", all the buildings that have been erected since passage in 1996 of the UGB demonstrate that no developer and no planning commission considered the UGB a mandate to jettison the building height restrictions or other Levels of Service standards regarding traffic and building in the flood plain.

    Larry was indeed one of the public spokespersons, as I was the UGB Committee Coordinator.
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  11. TopTop #11
    LQUINNT
     

    Re: Sustainability and Sebastopol’s Northeast Area

    I am inspired to witness this in-depth conversation about Sebastopol's sustainability, and support all interested participants to realize this common ground, and attempt to reconcile differences in pursuit of proactive solutions. This was my platform nearly 2 years ago when I got involved with the specific planning process as the co-founder of "EcoVision Sebastopol" a coalition working for a sustainable specific plan.

    The 50+ member EcoVision team influenced much of the current specific plan's progressive policies, but went further in calling for a fully sustainable community that is waste-free, car-free, has net-positive energy production, requires non-toxic practices and models "restorative" design by integrating restoration of the laguna into any future development. We called for recycling/reuse all of the materials currently onsite, requiring local hiring and other economic policies that would ensure no negative impact on the city and life elsewhere.

    I would argue that the current development in the NEA is far from sustainable, as much of it sits vacant and unusable based on the current building codes. The pavement leads to toxic runoff in the laguna, and prevents groundwater recharge. Housing is very limited/expensive in town due to limited supply, and the appearance of these industrial buildings are not necessarily the ideal gateway into our quaint country town, plus they serve as a physical barrier that separates the laguna from the town...

    I would echo Councilman Robinson's statement that the specific plan is not a development plan, and acknowledge that what will truly happen in the NEA will depend upon private developers and market feasibility. That being said, I am in full support of multiple pathways for moving forward including:
    1] Doing a comprehensive map of what resources the community currently has and needs to be more sustainable, and to evaluate both the social and eocnomic feasbility of development in this area
    2] Providing community members with more information about how the specific plan will change the general plan, and allowing additional public forums facilitated by LOCAL representatives and DOCUMENTED so that remote consultants do not gloss over the visions contributed by locals.
    3] Adding a policy to the specific plan that would require developers to meet the "One Planet Living" sustainable development requirements currently being implemented by Codding Enterprises in Rohnert Park-- obviously a feasible economic move that has far more progressive requirements than "green building"
    and/or
    4] Requiring developments of a certain size (height?) to engage in a "Community Benefit Agreement" with diverse stakeholder groups in the community to facilitate win-win agreements that save time and money while resulting in the most beneficial opportunities for everyone involved

    I work for an organization called the Livability Project which specializes in supporting all of these kinds of efforts, and would be ecstatic to serve Sebastopol in finding COLLABORATIVE SOLUTIONS for the NEA and beyond! Interested people can email me at [email protected], and I would like to know from city officials what the next steps would be for contributing to this process.

    On a final note, I know that a lot of the visions expressed in this post, and in the previous work of EcoVision Sebastopol are "unconventional" but as Councilman Robinson says, things are beginning to change, and Sebastopol is in a prime position to be modeling a new way to develop. That being said, community involvement and transparency in the decision-making process will have a great impact on the quality of what happens in Sebastopol, and I strongly hope for more follow-through from our public servants on this issue.

    I have been studying sustainable development for years, and have many strategic opportunities to present to the community for consideration including developing a downtown ecovillage, a "Living Water Institute" and a regional center for Gaia University-- all of which would support and actually ensure the authentic sustainable development of this area, without compromise and in exemplifying our integrity and the potential of development for the rest of the world!

    Let's make it happen!!!!

    If not here, where? If not now, when? If not us, who?

    -Lauren Quinn Thomas
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  12. TopTop #12
    Helen Shane's Avatar
    Helen Shane
     

    Re: Sustainability and Sebastopol’s Northeast Area



    Thanks, Lauren, for expressing your thoughts about shortcomings of the Northeast Area Plan.

    For instance, your point 2] "Providing community members with more information about how the specific plan will change the general plan, and allowing additional public forums facilitated by LOCAL representatives and DOCUMENTED so that remote consultants do not gloss over the visions contributed by locals."

    While the consultants hired by the city were, I am sure, outstanding in their field, the Draft EIR and Draft Plan did not reflect, in the opinion of many, input from the community.

    I note that you also commented that the EIR did not evaluate how the changes to the General Plan, (putatively necessitated by the design of the NE Plan) would affect the rest of the community.

    Thanks for your comments.
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  13. TopTop #13
    nicofrog's Avatar
    nicofrog
     

    Re: Sustainability and Sebastopol’s Northeast Area

    Well;
    here we go, such a huge topic,and me,an uneducated lozer of previous environmental struggles with a city in Marin.... My observations may be
    unrealistic to say the least.first a question;

    ECONOMIC SUSTAINABILITY ???????

    HUH? isn't that like the ULTIMATE oxymoron??? I mean what about inflation,and the trickle-down theory, and enron and my creditcard debt, and everyone else's practically .. is a healthy economy such a big concern
    for Sebastopol?? doesn't down town San Francisco have a healthy economy?
    what good does it do the homeless. more or less grafiti,thats how I measure the Health of an urban environment,that and the starbucks density
    index!
    I think our economic system is built on and addicted to GROWTH
    like a shark that must keep swimming, and is a concern for real estate investors and Lawyers who profit from it ,period.
    They talk about tax base,and having good fire and police services...
    there was a crazy accident down town between Chris. and New Years,
    some guy went nuts in a pick up and hit two cars. there were 6 cop cars and an ambulance and two fire trucks there in 10 min. some of the cops had assault rifles. I think our service infrastructure is fine thank you.
    If we add so much traffic that the firetrucks can't get through,it won't do any good to have more or bigger firetrucks.
    I think it's wonderful that everyone and every thing suddenly wants to be GREEN. However calling building Green building because it has solar
    and squiggly light bulbs does not make it green, check the construction dumpsters if you want to see how "green" it actually is.
    Every new construction contributes huge waste for hauling and burying. If our concern is truly green it would probably make sense to return all flood plains to marshland....probably not an option cause theres too much money to be made.
    I disagree that Sebastopol could benefit somehow from a new area with more businesses. There are plenty of old buildings that could use a facelift and accommodate businesses easily. It's time to go to the county building dep. code offices and begin to bring THEM into the 20"th century
    all the codes are designed to discourage remodeling and make it more economical to do new building with all the new tricks and bells and whistles that requires.then we have to buy all that new junk,and toss out the old.
    "Green building" is shackled by codes that require toxic "ground contact wood" etc that fill the dumpsters with more toxic waste because Waste Management can't get its head far enough above profit line to deal with problems like that and fiberglass, and many other hazardous
    materials that are still very much a compromise in the Green building world.
    Fiberglass asphalt roofing is toxic and irritant ,and 90% of all buildings have it and discard it when demolished. Fiberglass insulation, same problem.
    Many Green landscapers and nurserymen still use perlite and vermiculite in soil mixes . little by little we make changes but it all takes time.
    How could the "new thinking" of this bright spirited community
    best be shown in how we encourage old big land owners to balance profit with beauty,environmental health? I'm going to stretch for a new phrase here to replace E.S. "Economic Responsibility"?
    A town that has great resources for the appreciation of ,enjoyment of
    and nurturing of it's downtown homeless? a town that sees its teens in Safeway Parking lot and creates great art centers that draw the teens into
    projects that benefit them and the planet? A town that can appreciate the teens message in busting up and marking on the posts at the downtown square, And finds easy ways to give vent to their frustrations?
    Wow, that would be great.
    We have MANY businesses in town that do not re-cycle,there are food suppliers that provide for us wonderfully,and send literally TONS of waste food to landfill ,will the new town development address this issue.?
    Many don't realize that food waste in land fill is now considered the top contributor to global warming greenhouse gasses. I would like to know about local groups that are taking a concern with this issue directly.
    Nico 707 684 0341
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  14. TopTop #14
    Helen Shane's Avatar
    Helen Shane
     

    Re: Sustainability and Sebastopol’s Northeast Area


    Sebastopol Preservation Coalition




    The City Council Meeting on Tuesday, January 15 was amazing!

    Even after more chairs were set up, the room was jammed with people standing, or sitting on the floor. Some were there to protest the citywide WiFi system the Council recently approved. A large number attended to support SPC’s request to the Council for a study session to examine how changes to the General Plan would effect the city and county outside the Northeast Area. Both groups
    had the opportunity to hear and understand each other’s issues.

    Before the meeting actually started, Mayor Craig Litwin announced that Sam Pierce and Linda Kelley would be absent: Kelley was working on her storm-damaged property in Mendocino; Pierce for family reasons; Larry Robinson was ill, but would briefly attend the meeting so a quorum could act on agenda items; public comments would begin after that.

    Larry left after that business was concluded, leaving only Craig and Sarah at the table.

    Public comments were invited.


    Each person who spoke was passionate, knowledgeable and sincere, bringing up concerns including enhancing our Laguna instead of further encroaching, protecting our water supply, decreasing traffic, supporting the businesses that already exist and in general preserving the beauty, integrity and character of our small town.

    When SPC speaker Nansi Weil asked audience members who support a study session to stand, most of the people in the room rose.



    Fifth District County Planning Commissioner Rue Furch, who is running for Fifth Dist. Supervisor seat, asked the Council to work with the county on mutual issues, especially those General Plan changes that would affect areas outside the city, in particular the traffic and floodplain issues.

    Paul Andre Schabracq read a memo to the Council, signed by a number of authors of the General Plan to urge public discussion and consideration now, “to insure transparency and truly representational and democratic governance.”

    The Council was asked if they would be willing to put these items on a future agenda. The Mayor said only that they would consider requests from both groups.

    Our work continues.

    Action Items

    We have people who have committed to walk the citywide newsletter to each household. More is better. Many hands make light work.

    It takes two to three hours to cover an assigned route. You can do it in one day or over several days. Your choice.

    We will be doing this during the last week of January/
    first week in February.

    Please email: [email protected] if you will take part in this critical task.

    And, you guessed it, we need money now to cover printing and copying and large folders for the packets.

    Please send what you can to Clare Najarian, 357 Neva St., Sebastopol. 95472. Make your check to: OWL/SPC.

    We can do this together.


    Your response so far has been very heartening.

    The Northeast Plan is very big.

    Let’s make the best of it, not the most of it.



    January 18, 2008


    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  15. TopTop #15
    Helen Shane's Avatar
    Helen Shane
     

    Re: Sustainability and Sebastopol’s Northeast Area

    Sebastopol Preservation Coalition


    At the next City Council meeting the council may respond to SPC’s request for a study session to explain how changes in the General Plan as “required” by the Northeast Plan will affect the rest of Sebastopol.

    Please come to this meeting- add your voice or just your presence


    The Northeast Plan as proposed dictates changes in our General Plan that will impact our small town in many ways, for example:

    Traffic - removal of current General Plan traffic restrictions that will result in overflow to the neighborhoods, Gravenstein North and South, Healdsburg Ave, Bodega Ave, etc.

    Building Heights - change of zoning that would result in up to 25 acres of 4 story buildings on top of up to 10-foot fill or podia.

    Affordable Housing quota reduced to 20% from citywide 25%.

    Growth Management – NE area exempt from 25 market rate units per yr.

    Take Action

    Attend the next City Council meeting on February 5



    Speak of the need for the City Council to tell the community
    how these changes will affect all of Sebastopol


    More info or comments?
    Telephone Holly Downing at 823-6286 or Magick at 824-1394
    or email [email protected]


    The Northeast Area is very big.
    Let’s make the best of it, not the most of it.

    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  16. TopTop #16
    Zeno Swijtink's Avatar
    Zeno Swijtink
     

    We need community impact reporting

    https://www.neweconomynorthbay.org/news_room.php?id=95

    What is a Community Impact Report?

    When policy makers decide to invest public dollars in a development project, they usually do so in the belief that their investment will boost the local economy, enrich tax coffers and improve the local quality of life.

    But these decisions sometimes backfire or have less than stellar results. A publicly-subsidized superstore, for example, may result in other stores being driven out of business, a glut of low-wage/low benefits jobs and-their counterparts-an increased demand for subsidized housing and welfare programs. Similarly, policy makers might decide to make a construction loan to developers of a sports stadium only to find, once the stadium is built, that ticket sales and sponsorships do not meet the level necessary to trigger repayment of the debt.

    Several cities throughout California have begun to utilize Community Impact Reporting, a new development review tool designed to more systematically and accurately predict and measure the costs and benefits of proposed public/private partnerships and subsidies.

    The need for a tool like this is particularly acute in California, where local jurisdictions are severely limited in the amount of money they can raise and must rely on sales tax dollars for most of their General Fund activities. Any project that holds the promise of generating significant sales tax dollars understandably holds a natural, and sometimes blinding, attraction for policy makers.

    The Community Impact Report's organization and scope grow out of the local jurisdiction's police powers and the "right to know" precedents that began to be set in the 1980s as the public began to demand more accountability in the development process. Like an Environmental Impact Report, a CIR is an advisory document, designed to provide information but not to dictate to policy-makers. The CIR has benefits for both developers and interested community members-providing information and a forum to citizens and alerting developers to community concerns early on in the process.

    The report studies numerous areas, all in an effort to make accurate predictions about a proposed project's costs and benefits to a community.

    First, is the proposed project economically viable and will it be profitable to the local community? Will the business succeed and contribute to the tax base as hoped? Will that contribution be offset by losses elsewhere? Second, what kinds of jobs will the business create? Low wage jobs increase strain on workers and their families and, in turn, on schools and public services. When public dollars go toward subsidizing low-wage employment, it is important to measure the true costs and to note which community members and institutions will be paying those costs. Additionally, the reports asks if the project will contribute to the need for affordable housing, and at what income level the need will be most acute. This is a hugely important question in the North Bay, where exorbitant land costs contribute to the fact that most cities fail to meet even the affordable housing targets given to them by the State (targets which most experts agree are inadequate to meet housing needs). The report also looks at whether the project will create a need for additional community services and benefits-childcare, parks, road improvements-and the benefits the project will provide. CIRS also measure the Smart Growth attributes of a proposed project.

    What triggers a CIR?

    Different cities have different triggers. Some require a CIR for any project in a redevelopment agency; others base the requirement on project size, subsidy size or the nature and scale of the potential impacts on a community.

    Who creates a CIR?

    In California, there are many examples where cities have prepared analyses that make up parts of a CIR. For example, cities that have adopted per square foot development fees for affordable housing or childcare have first conducted "nexus" studies that look at the impact of types of commercial projects (retail, office, etc.) on the community. Also, some cities have studied the effects of big-box retail projects on local businesses and tax revenues. Usually a consultant chosen by a city council will prepare these studies, just as they do for Environmental Impact Reports (EIR). Typically the cost of these analyses is passed on to the developer. City staff will review the consultant's work and may note any area of disagreement or staff may add information as needed. In some cities, staff provides the pertinent analyses. A simple CIR can be relatively brief (50 pages) and take no more than three months to complete. However, for larger projects, a CIR that covers a wide range of impacts could take 6 months or more. The City of Los Angeles adopted a CIR policy for new large commercial and industrial projects in its redevelopment districts. The City of San Jose will soon adopt a comprehensive CIR policy.

    How does a CIR differ from an EIR?

    Environmental Impact Reports, mandated under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), are concerned only with environmental impacts, not broader land use and community development policies. It does not examine the issues a CIR does-economic impacts, community services and amenities impacts, affordable housing needs, etc. The CIR functions as a companion to the EIR.

    Who benefits by a CIR?

    The CIR has benefits for both developers and interested community members-providing information and a forum to citizens and alerting developers to community concerns early on in the process. A CIR can also help build support for a project early in the planning process and avoid costly delays or litigation.

    Excerpted from the report (pp 60-61): The 'Limits of Prosperity: Growth, Inequality, and Poverty in the North Bay' by New Economy, Working Solutions (NEWS) 2005. Available at https://neweconomynorthbay.org


    ********************
    https://www1.arguscourier.com/articl...ON02/967190491

    GUEST COMMENTARY
    We need community impact reporting
    Published: Wednesday, Jan 23, 2008

    By TIFFANY RENÉE
    Petaluma is as famous for its innovative spirit as it is for its charm. In 1975, Petaluma residents made history as the first city in the country to affirm our right to manage growth through the Environmental Design Plan, a challenge we took all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court. And in 1998 residents voted to establish our urban growth boundary to reduce sprawl and create infill development.

    While that progressive spirit persists, urgent challenges — including adequate funding for local services, developing a vibrant, durable economy and curbing global warming — require us to seek new growth management tools that allow us to embrace our past without compromising our future. A community impact report is one new tool that can reveal changing circumstances and incorrect assumptions in generating new sources of revenue.

    A coalition of various concerned groups is advocating for a CIR ordinance. Petaluma Community Coalition — composed of Living Wage Coalition, Sonoma County Conservation Action, Accountable Development Coalition, North Bay Labor Council, Petaluma Independent Business Alliance, New Economy Working Solutions, Petaluma Neighborhood Association, Petaluma Tomorrow, Conservation Action Fund for Education, Petaluma Federation of Teachers and students from Casa Grande and Petaluma High — support adoption of a CIR. This coalition is not anti-development. The mutual goals of these groups include living-wage jobs, safe, pedestrian-friendly communities, responsible development, and a vibrant local economy.

    With a CIR, policy-makers can generate sound decisions on proposed commercial development projects. The CIR functions as a corollary to the EIR (environmental impact report) by factoring in the hidden costs: impacts on small businesses, public health and safety, welfare services, job quality, and affordable housing. The proposed ordinance being presented to the City Council is similar to a recent state law passed in Maine, the Informed Growth Act.

    CIRs provide a non-biased publicly reviewed cost-benefit analysis, enabling the public and our elected council to make informed land-use decisions, and establish crucial criteria for prioritization of projects. This is essential to evaluating the 1.5 million square feet of new retail projects currently waiting processing. A CIR would occur after a community scooping meeting, and be triggered based on project size. The report is not costly or time-consuming — and in fact could expedite a project by initiating a public dialogue at the application, thereby reducing impacts to the community, avoiding backlash and lawsuits that stop or significantly delay projects, reducing costs to the city, the community and the developers.

    CIR-type ordinances have been implemented successfully in many cities including Benicia, Calif.; Albuquerque, N.M.; and Carbondale, Colo. Simply put, CIRs are good public policy; they allow our council, our chamber, developers and the public to look at the economic and lifestyle effects of any large-scale developments so that we, the residents and businesses of Petaluma, will be well informed before decisions are set in stone.

    In 2006, Petaluma was rated No. 1 out of 101 Bay Area cities by Greenbelt Alliance, based on our smart growth policies. The Office of the State Attorney General also commended Petaluma’s commitment to adopt goals of the climate protection campaign: reducing greenhouse gases 25 percent below 1990 levels by 2015. To reach our goals and keep our commitments, we need to apply new development and economic standards for responsible land use and planning. The CIR will help us get there.

    If we are to develop a truly durable, green local economy and maintain our small-town charm, we need significant greenhouse gas reductions through transit-oriented green building within our UGB, clean air and water conservation initiatives, and green jobs for the emerging energy-independent green economy — and we must do it in a responsible way that supports our local businesses. The CIR offers that informed, responsible decision-making tool. A public CIR presentation to City Council takes place at 7 p.m. Monday, Jan. 28 at City Hall. I urge you to attend this important presentation.

    (Tiffany Renee chairs the city’s Technology and Telecommunications Advisory Committee, is vice-chair of the Sonoma County Commission on the Status of Women and is a fellow of the Leadership Institute for Ecology and the Economy.)
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  17. TopTop #17
    Helen Shane's Avatar
    Helen Shane
     

    Re: Sustainability and Sebastopol’s Northeast Area

    Sebastopol Preservation Coalition

    Your Attendance

    at The Sebastopol City Council

    this Tuesday, February 5
    is
    URGENT


    The agenda states the Planning Director will give an Information Update on Response to Questions posed at the January 15 City Council meeting regarding the Northeast Plan.

    Primary among the questions and requests at that meeting was the following letter to Council Members from General Plan authors about impacts the Northeast Plan would have on the whole city :

    “Because these changes are so far-reaching, we feel it is important that there be a public presentation and discussion specifically on these proposed General Plan amendments and their broader impacts. A City Council study session or agenda item would be the appropriate way of fulfilling this public responsibility of the City Council.
    We urge public discussion and consideration now, before” (emphasis added) “further Council consideration of the NE Area Specific Plan to insure transparency and truly representational and democratic governance.”


    It is up to the Mayor and Councilpersons
    to allow public discussion of this item.
    Please attend the meeting.
    Persuade the Council to do the right thing.

    Tuesday, February 5 at 7p.m.
    Youth Annex nr the Community Center
    Morris St., Sebastopol

    Let's Make the Best of It, Not the Most of It.
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  18. TopTop #18
    Helen Shane's Avatar
    Helen Shane
     

    Re: Sustainability and Sebastopol’s Northeast Area

    Sebastopol Preservation Coalition



    Exciting Update

    A pivotal Council meeting will be held on
    February 19 following the action
    s at the February 5 meeting:


    Linda Kelley Saved the Day!


    :goodjob:

    In front of the packed house, approved were:
    • Council Member Linda Kelley’s motion to agendize SPC’s request to publicly discuss the proposed General Plan amendments that would impact the rest of the community.
    • A discussion on whether or not to terminate the
    entire process for the Northeast Area Plan.

    It is now possible that this whole expensive process (with outside consultants paid $470,000 to sell this project) will be terminated and we can come together as a community to decide for ourselves how to best use this area.

    Great ideas could blossom again, like giving land back to the Laguna wetlands, creating a community garden, a year round farmers market, and encouraging incubator businesses closer to the Plaza, that would manufacture products that we now import. There is even the possibility that we could establish a public trust to buy this land.



    Please come to the City Council Meeting:
    Tuesday, February 19, 7 pm

    Community Center (probably)



    And of course, come to the
    Sebastopol Preservation Coalition
    meeting at Palm Drive Hospital

    Wednesday, February 13, 7 pm


    We will be studying the proposed General Plan amendments
    and the possibility of termination of the current NE Area Plan

    [email protected] or [email protected] or call Clare at 823-1405
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

  19. TopTop #19
    LQUINNT
     

    Re: Sustainability and Sebastopol’s Northeast Area

    I am happy to hear that the council has approved the citizen's request to discuss the general plan amendments and give more public input into the NEA planning process. I do NOT agree with terminating the $470,000 planning process that has begun, and see this as throwing the baby out with the bath water. There are many progressive policies (for example no net fill, green building, energy etc.) that were influenced by previous citizen participation that should not be discarded!

    I do STRONGLY support terminating the contract with the consultants, and extending the planning process to be led by a diverse citizen group that will incorporate even more of what our community wants, such as healing the Laguna, incubating local economic development and having a larger local market in town.

    I have been discussing the possibility of renting space in the NEA to have a public venue to vision and create the most beneficial use of that region-- the model would be based on sliding scale monthly donations and revenues from events held in the space-- and potentially products manufactured there such as recycled paper, or plant starts. This could really support greater public awareness and engagement in the process, and should be a collaboration amongst those of us who are already passionately involved.

    I am currently in Hawaii co-facilitating a permaculture/holistic-design workshop and will not be returning until the end of this month. That being said, I would really appreciate it if people who resonate with this vision represent it at the meeting on the 19th and please get in touch with me regarding your interest in the community space (potentially called "The Dreamery").

    I feel so much potential for us to reclaim this process and transform the dissonance into a harmonic process of cocreation!

    Aloha and Namaste,
    Lauren Quinn Thomas
    (707) 486-4672
    [email protected]
    Last edited by Barry; 02-11-2008 at 09:24 AM.
    | Login or Register (free) to reply publicly or privately   Email

Similar Threads

  1. Sebastopol Northeast Plan Update
    By Kenyon Webster in forum General Community
    Replies: 27
    Last Post: 05-15-2008, 05:27 PM
  2. Retail market study, Northeast Area
    By Kenyon Webster in forum General Community
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 08-29-2006, 08:15 AM
  3. Emerging Agreements, Northeast Area Plan
    By Kenyon Webster in forum General Community
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 05-30-2006, 12:41 PM

Bookmarks